Complaint: Violation of para.

a,
Sec. 50, Chapter 1, Title III of
Republic Act No. 7394

MS. BOOTS ANSON A LICUANAN The MANAGER

Complainant Respondent
Blk 8, Lot 11, SJV7, Ph1 Enterprises Bodega Surplus Depot/
Brgy. Marinig, Cabuyao, Laguna ZYT Enterprises, # 68,
Dr. Santos Ave., Brgy. San Isidro,
Paranaque City, Metro Manila

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, I, the Complainant, unto this Honorable Office

respectfully avers that:

1. I am BOOTS ANSON A LICUANAN, Filipino, of legal age and resident

of Blk 8, Lot11, Ph1 Enterprises, Brgy. Marining, Cabuyao, Laguna
where I may be served with summons and processes of this
Honorable Office;

2. Respondent BODEGA SURPLUS DEPOT/ZYT Enterprises (Bodega

Depot for brevity) represented by its Manager is operating as
distributor/dealer of surplus products with office address at # 68,
Dr. Santos Avenue, Brgy. San Isidro, Paranaque City, Metro Manila
where it may be served of summons and other processes of this
Honorable Office;

Facts of the case

3. On September 19, 2015, respondent sold to me a product known as

‘Meat Cutter’ or particularly described as “Workzone Bonesaw” in
the respondent’s issued receipt dated September 19, 2015,
amounting to PHP 13,888.00 pesos.1

4. During the course of the negotiation, I have fully explained to the

personnel of respondent in the person of Marjorie Sanches that I am
looking for a meat cutter intended for fresh meat as I am engaged in
the business of selling meat. Ms. Sanchez positively confirmed to me
that the mentioned product is the one I’m looking for. However,
contrary to that representation, the product turned out to be not fit
for fresh meat but for frozen meat;

1
Receipt # 000166 dated September 19, 2015 as Annex A.
 5. November 20, 2015, I discovered that the item delivered to me do
not correspond to the item that I intended to buy, hence, I
immediately returned the same to the respondent with
acknowledgement receipt.2

6. However, upon demand of the returned of the amount that I paid

for the item, the respondent and its personnel offered no positive
response about it, and the same remained to be unheeded until my
filing of a complaint against respondent in the Department of Trade
and Industry- Laguna on June 30, 2016.3

7. Consequently, the Department of Trade and Industry-Laguna

issued a Notice of Mediation on June 27, 2016 4 , however, the
respondent or any representative did not appear despite notice,
thus the issuance of the mentioned office of the Notice of Failure of
Mediation5 on July 04, 2016, and my filing of this action;

Issues

8. The important issues involved in this case are: whether or not

misrepresentation as to the performance or characteristics of a
product is allowed under the present sales and practice act? and
whether or not the complainant is entitled to the return of the
amount paid for the item?

Law and Jurisprudence

9. Under the Consumer Act of the Phillipines, the act or practice of a

seller or supplier is considered deceptive when it represents that a
consumer product or service has the sponsorship, approval,
performance, characteristics, ingredients, accessories, uses, or
benefits it does not have;6

10. Consumer Act of the Philippines likewise provide that in case of

breach of implied warranty, the consumer may retain in the
goods and recover damages, or reject the goods, cancel the
contract and recover from the seller so much of the purchase
price as has been paid, including damages;7

11.Likewise, in the sale of goods, there is an implied warranty as to

the quality or fitness of the goods where the buyer expressly or

2
Acknowledgement Note dated November 21, 2016 as Annex C.
3
Id at 2.
4
Notice of Mediation dated June 27, 2016 as Annex D.
5
Notice of Failure of Mediation dated July 04, 2016 as Annex E.
6
Para a, Section 50, Chapter 1, Title III of Republic Act No. 7394, Otherwise Known as the Consumer Act of the
Phillipines.
7
Cited in Carlos b. De Guzman vs. Sandoval-Guttierrez, G.R. No. 141480, November 29, 2006, Section 68, para f
(2) of the RA 7394.
 by implication, makes known to the seller the particular
purpose for which the goods are acquired, and it appears that
the buyer relies on the seller’s skills or judgment, there is an
implied warranty that the goods shall be reasonably fit for such
purpose. 8 Under this instance, the vendee may elect between
withdrawing from the contract and demand proportionate
reduction of the price, with damages in either case;9

12. “DTI Department Administrative Order No. 007-0619 reiterates

the power of the DTI Adjudication Officer to impose the following
penalties upon the respondent, if warranted, and even if these have
not been prayed for by the complainant: "(3) The restitution or
rescission of the contract without damages; x x x (5) The
imposition of an administrative fine in such amount as deemed
reasonable by the Adjudication Officer, which shall in no case be less
than Five Hundred Pesos (P500.00) nor more than Three Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P300,000.00) depending on the gravity of the
offense, and [an] additional administrative fine of not more than
One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) for each day of continuing
violation x x x."10 (Emphasis supplied)

Conclusion/s

13. It is indisputable that I immediately returned the product upon

discovery that the same is not in accord with the use that I am
expecting about it and the respondent has acknowledged receipt of
the same when returned. The personnel of the respondent have
even promised to me the return of the amount paid for the item
after confirmation from the Manager;

14. It is crystal clear from the surrounding facts that respondent has
committed a form of unfair and deceptive sales act and such act has
caused great prejudice to me for losing hold of the money I paid to
the item and not able to utilize the product as intended;

15. The policy of the State for the protection of the consumer is
reiterated in Article 48 of the Consumer Act, which provides that
the State shall promote and encourage fair, honest and equitable
relations among parties in consumer transactions and protect the
consumer against deceptive, unfair and unconscionable sales acts
or practices;

16. The above-mentioned policy of the State as enunciated under

Republic Act No. 9374 is also reinforced by the provisions of the

8
Art. 1562 of the Civil Code of the Phillipines;
9
Art 1567 of the Civil Code of the Phillipines.
10
Autozentrum Alabang vs.Bernardo, G.R. No. 214122, June 08, 2016.
 Civil Code of the Philippines in case of breach of implied warranties
by the seller;

Relief

17. WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that

this Honorable Office grant the following:

a. to penalize respondent for the mentioned unfair and deceptive

sales act and practice;

b. to order the respondent to return the amount paid for the item
amounting to PHP 13, 888.00, including the cost of this action;
and

c. the imposition of other administrative penalties against the

respondent just under the circumstances.

BOOTS ANSON A LICUANAN

Complainant

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, BOOTS ANSON A LICUANAN, of legal age, after having been duly

sworn in accordance with law, depose and state that:

1. I am a plaintiff in the above-stated case;

2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint;

3. I have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true
and correct of my personal knowledge and/or on the basis of copies of
documents and records in my possession;

4. I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the

same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal
or agency;

5. To the best of my knowledge and belief, no such action or proceeding

is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal
or agency;
 6. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that fact within five (5)
days therefrom to this Honorable Office.

BOOTS ANSON A LICUANAN

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day of __________ 200_

at _________________ affiant exhibiting to me his Community Tax Certificate
No.____________________ issued on ________________ 200_ at ______________ City.

Doc. No. __________;

Page No.__________ ;
Book No. __________;
Series of 2017.